Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010222382025 2025:GAU-AS:14252 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6031/2025 SAIDUL AHMED SON OF SAMSUDDIN AHMED, R/O BHUYAN PATTY, A.J.B. ROAD, P.O. HAIBORGAON, MOUZA- TOWN AND P.S. SADAR IN THE DISTRICT OF NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782001. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006. 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT BASISTHA ASSAM WATER CENTRE GUWAHATI-29. 3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER NAGAON WATER RESOURCES DIVISION NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782001. 4:THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES RAHA IN THE DISTRICT OF NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782103 5:THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER Page No.# 2/3 NAGAON WATER RESOURCE DIVISION NAGAON PIN-782001 For the petitioner (s) : Mr. S. S.S. Rahman, Advocate For the respondent (s) : Ms. R. Deka, SC Water Resources BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH O R D E R 27.10.2025 Heard Mr. S. S. S. Rahman, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. R. Deka, the learned counsel who appears on behalf of the Water Resources Department. 2. The petitioner herein has sought for appropriate direction upon the respondents for payment of an amount of Rs.4,76,894/- claiming that the said amount has been due to the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the amount which the petitioner claims is pertaining to the work done purportedly by the petitioner from 20.12.2014 to 10.03.2015. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in a proceedings of the present nature, it would be difficult to make necessary verification. Page No.# 3/3 4. Per contra, Mr. S. S. S. Rahman, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the respondents have duly admitted the same. However, he further submitted that taking into account that there are certain aspects which would require adjudication of facts, the petitioner would be well advised to approach the appropriate Civil Court seeking adjudication. 5. Taking into account the above, the instant writ petition stands closed on withdrawal. 6. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the appropriate Civil Court, if otherwise permissible under the law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant